Active Disinterest

So, after Saturday night's realizations, I spent some time thinking about how to show less interest. I talked to Stallion a bit about this, and he had some useful thoughts as well.

One thing I thought about is that I show too much interest with my body language. At first, I had a problem with not locking in (I would stand where I opened for the duration of the set). Eventually, I learned to lock in. However, my lock-in usually involves facing the target directly, and getting as close as possible.

One thing that I have discovered to work is to stand side-by-side with the target, head facing towards her. She will move to face you if she is interested (it actually happens pretty quickly). I usually try to repeat this once (not sure whether this helps).

I might also want to be more playful with my kino. A lot of my kino involves intentional touches to the arms or back. I might want to start a bit more informally. Thumb war seems to work pretty well (high five a girl, grab her hand, and thumb war her).

So what Stallion told me fundamentally changed my perception of the course of a set. My previous view was that it is important to stay in set for as long as possible. When you are a newbie, this can be a good thing. However, by virtue of staying in set, you inherently telegraph interest. Eventually, the target starts wondering why this guy is talking to her for so long. Especially if you run natural game and aren't playing dancing monkey.

So instead, why not excuse yourself mid-thread and come back later? You can go talk to friends, or better yet, open another set. Several minutes later, you show up again, and step right back in where you were.

In fact, I unintentionally did this on Friday night. I opened a set, ran it for a while, and then wondered where my wing was, so I ejected. Later on, I saw the girls in the other room. The target smiled and waved at me. Its funny how most of what you unintentionally do right can be explained logically once you develop the proper tools.

This is key for solo gaming, where you don't have a wing to occupy the obstacle. Something I have learned is that the obstacle WILL inevitably drag the target away from you. This doesn't necessarily mean that the target isn't interested in you - I think that by default the obstacle assumes that the target isn't having a good time and tries to drag her away after a preset time. I used to view this as a "blowout," but now I kind of see that it is just a signal to move on (or that you should have already moved on). By moving around, and talking to everyone, you do two things. First of all, you build up social proof, and aren't the lone wolf there just to mack on chicks. But you also build value by only spending a few minutes with each group at a time (until you pick your target, at which point you gradually start spending more and more time with her). I'm guessing that is how Stallion runs his game.

Previously, I had thought that a set ended when the drag-away happened. You couldn't stand around looking like a chode and losing value - the only option was to eject and move forward. As someone who is learning to be non-reactive, I don't cry over spilled sets, and put them out of my mind as soon as I am no longer engaged. But this might not be strictly correct, and could even be a bit counterproductive.

Last night, my final set was actually going pretty well when the target went to get a drink. She said "stay there," or something of the sort. I had to go home, so I left, but had I wanted to, I should have opened another set, ran it for a while, and then gone back. Something else to try would be to back-merge the new set ("let's make some new friends").

And so the plot thickens. There is so much more to learn, when I was hoping for a quick realization that would allow me to figure this out once and for all. I wonder when I will get to the bottom of the rabbit hole?